The bail hearing of Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) functionaries Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka was deferred in Delhi on Sunday, October 18, after the Special Executive Magistrate (SEM) handling the matter did not arrive at the scheduled time and later recused himself, citing threats and mental harassment. Delhi Police subsequently registered a non-cognisable report against unidentified persons following the magistrate’s complaint.
The CJP, however, alleged that authorities were deliberately delaying the proceedings to prevent the two leaders from being released, while police denied the allegation and said due procedure was being followed.
Hearing Stalls For Hours
The hearing was scheduled for Sunday as Das and Ranka remained in judicial custody following their arrest earlier this month. CJP legal head Ratna Singh said the legal team had been waiting at the Mandir Marg police station since around 11 am, with the hearing expected at noon.
The SEM did not arrive for several hours, and the proceedings eventually took place only briefly in the evening. According to reports, the interaction lasted around eight to 10 minutes before the magistrate cited threats and mental harassment and stepped away from the matter.
Singh also alleged that four sureties submitted for the two leaders had been rejected on what the party described as vague grounds. She questioned why the alleged threat to the magistrate was being raised during proceedings concerning the release of Das and Ranka. The CJP has maintained that its leaders should not remain in custody because of procedural delays and has accused the authorities of obstructing their release.
Police Cite Threat
Delhi Police, meanwhile, said the magistrate had reported receiving threatening messages linked to the proceedings. Following his complaint, police registered a non-cognisable report against unidentified persons and began looking into the alleged threat. Officials have not publicly disclosed the identity of the person who allegedly sent the message or provided details of the threat.
Police have also rejected the CJP’s allegation that the release was being intentionally delayed. A senior police officer said the surety bonds submitted by the party were faulty and that officials were required to follow the prescribed procedure. The police position is that the process could not simply be completed without verification of the documents and sureties.
Why Are They In Custody?
Das and Ranka were detained on October 13 after allegedly entering the Jantar Mantar area by scaling locked gates. The site had recently been de-notified as a designated protest venue. The CJP leaders and other members had entered the area while unfurling the national flag and raising slogans as part of their wider protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
On October 14, an SEM ordered Das and Ranka to be sent to five days of judicial custody, stating that they had breached an earlier undertaking to maintain peace and that no satisfactory surety had been produced at that stage. The order listed October 19 for further inquiry. A third CJP member, Ajinkya Shinde, was released separately.
CJP Alleges Deliberate Delay
CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke has accused the authorities of deliberately prolonging the detention of Das and Ranka. In a post on X, he alleged that the state was using “delaying tactics” because it had no legal grounds to keep the two leaders behind bars. The party has said it would pursue legal remedies if the two were not released.
CJP’s legal team has also questioned why the alleged threat to the magistrate should affect the merits of the bail proceedings. At the same time, the threat allegation itself remains under police investigation, and there is currently no publicly available information establishing who issued it or why. The conflicting claims have therefore added another layer to an already contentious legal dispute surrounding the CJP arrests.
What Happens Next?
The matter was listed for October 19, when the five-day period of judicial custody was due to come up for further consideration. As of the latest reports, Das and Ranka remained in custody, while the police investigation into the alleged threat against the SEM was continuing.
The episode has brought attention not only to the CJP leaders’ detention but also to questions around how executive-magistrate proceedings are conducted, how sureties are verified and how allegations of threats should be handled without compromising either the safety of officials or the rights of people seeking release.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The right to protest peacefully and the responsibility to maintain public order must coexist in a democracy. At the same time, threats against a magistrate—if established—are serious and cannot be dismissed simply because they arise during a politically sensitive case.
The allegations from both sides deserve a transparent examination, while the legal process should remain fair, timely and free from intimidation. Can authorities and protesters ensure that disagreement is handled through due process and dialogue rather than escalating into confrontation and mistrust?
